Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience


Purple bamboo

Published Jan 24, 2013 09:03pm


Your Name:

Recipient Email:

“Midway upon the journey of our life / I found myself within a forest dark, For the straightforward pathway had been lost” — (Dante, Inferno)

THE early morning mist hangs heavy. Seemingly light and ephemeral, it smothers the ground — and hangs heavy on the soul too. No one knows when it will lift its burden. Perhaps later in the day? Perhaps later in the week?

While Islamabad is unquestioningly making the transition to spring, like the sun, when that spring will emerge is only for fools and pundits to judge. One can be optimistic like Kahlil Gibran that “In the heart of each winter’s day, lies a quivering spring”. But it has taken many winters for that spring to reveal itself. (Then again, the mist may not be a precursor to a sunshine-filled day at all. It could be a metaphor, as in Akira Kurosawa‘s brilliant Throne of Blood, the Japanese celluloid version of Macbeth, for losing our way; losing our moral compass.)

The events of the past few weeks, indeed even longer, have left me melancholic and confused. (Hence, the dark, brooding and disjointed nature of my thoughts in this piece.) Are we on the cusp of a stronger institutional base, with a fiery media, an independent chief justice, and a vibrant, social media-driven civil society strengthening the nation’s foundations? Or are we witnessing the vanquishing of the people, the victory of big money, corruption and entrenched vested interest, with only the outward ‘form’ of change?

What needs to happen for us to make a successful transition to a society based on the ‘rule of law’, where a measure of social justice prevails? Several readers of my previous column, Why nations fail, asked searching questions — questions to which I cannot even pretend to have answers for. The most pertinent was: who will change the system when ‘insiders’ have no incentive to change the status quo?

Last February, I wrote the following lines in my column titled System of spoils:

“It should be obvious that such widespread and pervasive rent-seeking on such brazen display can only thrive in the absence of strong institutions (and the presence of a large public sector). It is not surprising therefore that the ecosystem of weak and atrophying institutions serves the interests of Pakistan’s elites very well.

“…Compounding the sense of pessimism on this front, it is unclear what incentive corrupt ‘insiders’ have to change the status quo when they benefit so directly and so profusely from it. While there are incipient signs of hope in the appearance of a developing ‘middle-class consensus’, and the emergence of an assertive and activist superior judiciary, these successes can prove transient. The party that purports to represent the middle classes (MQM) is already co-opted by the ‘system’ and has been enjoying its forbidden fruits for a decade. …it is said big ‘chiefs’ are compromised to the hilt too.”

The co-option by ‘the system’ of large segments of the population has its unfortunate corollary: the absence of a genuine reform constituency, even in the middle class, and even in the media. The appearance of leading columnists and TV anchors in government-sponsored ads against hefty payments — or the practice of the government doling out plots in Islamabad to journalists — are all brazen examples of influential segments of the media selling their soul for the right price. The competition for public-sector ads, or the influence-peddling by owners of media houses to get special tax exemptions and waivers, are unfortunate evidence of how truly ‘independent’ the media is.

Co-option on such a large scale is prevalent across much of South Asia, with governments in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives all practising the same model of state control to varying degrees. India appears to be an exception, to the extent that its size ensures that such large-scale co-option is not feasible. In addition, it has the most relatively robust institutional framework in South Asia, thanks in large part to the vision of its founding fathers.

While I am no historian, my sense is that the coming to being of the Magna Carta that laid the foundation for eventual parliamentary democracy in the UK, was the result of conflict-resolution among equals — the barons on one side, and the king on the other. It made sense for the king to sue for peace and become less ‘extractive’ because the cost of extraction had risen in proportion to the military strength of the other side. (The other route to strong institutions and the ‘rule of law’ is enlightened self-interest — with few contemporary or historical examples.)

In this context, ‘people’s power’ becomes a valid doctrine, when sham democracies fail to provide for even the most basic of their constituents’ aspirations. While the Philippines under Marcos, Zimbabwe under Mugabe, and more recently Egypt and Tunisia under Mubarak and Ben Ali, have all been ‘democracies’ on paper, to the extent of holding of elections, the capture of the ruling elites of all constitutional mechanisms for their replacement — as well as of all resources — left the people only one choice. Hence, a predatory state ruled by an ‘extractive’ elite, sows the seeds of its own eventual demise by encouraging people’s power to take to the streets, or by making civil war more likely.

Coming to our own display of ‘people’s power’, judging by the bursting girths of the full range of Pakistan’s elected kleptocrats on display in the drama in Islamabad, all beaming and smiling after successfully ‘saving the system’, one can hazard a safe guess as to who is benefiting from democracy at the moment — and it’s not the hungry, unemployed, load-shed masses of Pakistan.

“’And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? / Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!” / He chortled in his joy.’

The writer is a former economic adviser to government, and currently heads a macroeconomic consultancy based in Islamabad.


Your Name:

Recipient Email:

The views expressed by this writer and commenters below do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

Comments (6) Closed

shariff Jan 25, 2013 11:51am
sharm unko magar nahi aati...........
Ameeds Jan 26, 2013 09:12am
Nicely written article, But, I do not believe most Pakistanis living in Pakistan (not the ones like me who have spent half their lives abroad) know the meaning of democracy. It seems more like a thought or a sort of twisted imagination to them. Or perhaps, they don't want to change. There are two thoughts that I keep on hearing from everyone. 1. From some where a Messiah should appear who should rid Pakistan all of it's ills. 2. Let's see what Allah has foreseen for Pakistan. Both of these thoughts make me wonder if there is any part that people have foreseen for themselves to improve the society. I mean wait for messiah and do nothing and at the same time, leave everything to Allah Almighty but still do nothing. In a democracy every vote counts. I bet all the politicians currently in all parliaments would be reelected again in the coming elections. If we complain so much then why do we continue to invest in the same corrupt people? Pakistan will improve and people will realize the power of Democracy if the elections are held and governments are transferred without military interruptions. Still it will take 10 to 15 years. Lastly, in every single country there are rotten eggs and that too in every industry (including media). The charms of media are that once someone well known becomes well known for corruption then the media itself settles the score. How wonderful revenge of media itself on itself. :-) So the few days of luxury and joys will eventually fade and reality will catch up, sooner or later.
raika45 Jan 25, 2013 01:33pm
No offence sri Sakib sahib, but tell me frankly how many of the readers of Dawn can comprehend and digest what you have written.Your meandering observations interspaced with language that is beyond the ability of a common man to understand what you are saying looses the sting of want you want to put across.Unless of course it was meant only for the intellect.In this case you have lost the millions for whom it was meant for,If I am not mistaken.As I said no offence meant.
Naveed Lotia Jan 25, 2013 06:31pm
Great piece Sakib. While the sins of Pakistan's dictatorial past are taking a huge toll on State & Society, one can only hope that the competing interests of the various stakeholders involved (as per your point; 'enlightened self interest') will lead to the evolution of democratic institutions and ultimately, imrovement
Khurram The Muhajir Jan 25, 2013 05:47pm
Zardari cannot be compared to Hosni Mubarak or Ben Ali unless and unless he rigs the elections.
Agha Ata (USA) Jan 25, 2013 03:14pm
Ah! You ignored the history again. Look at the last fifteen centuries the history has seen. I don?t say that there was no democracy, I would only ask, if there was one head of any Muslim country in the entire world, just one king or emperor, or so called president in modern times, or a dictator who willingly, happily, graciously handed over the reins of government to another, because he himself was old, or incapable, or had ruled for a long time; and if he did it without being assassinated (or killed) thrown out, or luckily died of natural death? How can you even think of democracy when this is the unchangeable mindset of all the heads of all Muslim countries?